I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the
Malaysia Airlines jet that went missing two weeks ago. I
guess we all have. The story has a high human interest factor. Not only
what on earth can have happened to the flight (my husband
and I have spent a good deal of time working through the possible
options -- mechanical fault, explosion, hijack, pilot suicide; and one can
imagine the Malaysian authorities doing exactly the same thing), but also
the empathy that one feels with those left behind.
How terribly difficult it must be to plan, to do anything, when you
simply don’t know what has happened to your loved ones. As unpalatable
as it may be, knowing with certainty that someone has died enables one to
grieve, deal with the situation as best one
can and, one hopes, eventually move forwards into the future. Not
knowing what has happened, however, must make it impossible to know how to act.
One must always be holding on to the hope that those people are still
alive and will, perhaps, turn up again one day, however vanishingly
small that possibility is in reality.
But the thing that strikes me most strongly in all
of this is the amount of multi-national effort that is being put into locating a plane that was carrying 227 people. Not that I would want this
to be any different (one imagines oneself in the shoes of
the relatives of the missing here), but it is amazing that so many
disparate countries (Malaysia, the US, Australia, China, Norway...) are cooperating
so willingly on this task. This contrasts sharply with the current situation in the Ukraine, for example, which sits so
dangerously on a knife edge and which, if the situation tips over into
all-out war, has the potential for death and destruction on a massively
greater scale. Yet there seems to be little likelihood of cooperation
or reconciliation here, despite the stakes
being so much higher.
What is it, then, that promotes international
cooperation in the Malaysia Airlines case? Is it the human angle -- the
fact that we can all empathise with the personal tragedy of the situation? But
why, then, aren't we able to do this so easily in cases of war or famine? Perhaps suffering on a small scale is simply something that we can
comprehend better than the ‘impersonality’ of mass suffering or mass
loss of life. Or perhaps it’s just that, in the Malaysia Airlines example,
those countries that are cooperating are able
to put aside their personal agendas and their differences because these things have no bearing on the specific case in hand.
There doesn't seem to be a definitive answer. But the question is a valid one, and the comparison an interesting one to draw.
No comments:
Post a Comment